Angelina Jolie's Double Mastectomy

The 'Maleficent' actress revealed earlier this week she had undergone a double mastectomy after tests revealed she carried the BRCA1 gene and had an 87 per cent chance of contracting breast cancer and a 50 per cent chance of contracting ovarian cancer - the disease which killed her mother, Marcheline Bertrand - and her brother James Haven thinks her decision to go public will be helpful to others.

20 May 2013 He told E! News: "There is no question Angelina makes a difference in our world by bringing awareness to so many causes. Her compassion for humanity alone always makes me honoured to call her my sister."

Meanwhile, Billy Bob Thornton has sent his best wishes to his 37-year-old ex-wife - who has children Maddox, 11, Pax, nine, Zahara, eight, Shiloh, six, and four-year-old twins Knox and Vivienne with fiance Brad Pitt - and praised her as a "tribute to mankind".

The actor - who married Angelina in May 2000 and separated from in June 2002 - told TMZ: "We've communicated but not talked. I think she is not only a tribute to mankind, but she's done so much for people, she deserves absolutely the best in every way. She always has and always will in my book."

Angelina Jolie's remarkable story about undergoing a preventative double mastectomy triggered an outpouring of empathy this week, as well as opened the door to the important discussion of women's health issues. Here are the five stories that sparked the strongest reactions from readers over this past week – the news that made you happy, sad, laugh out loud, awestruck, even angry.

I wanted to write this to tell other women that the decision to have a mastectomy was not easy," Angelina Jolie wrote in The New York Times on Tuesday. "But it is one I am very happy that I made." And readers loved her for revealing it – and appreciate her explaining why.

The testimony of those who have suffered breast cancer suggests that it is experienced as a severe loss of femininity. It provokes fears of being cut apart, of a terrible loss of control. It leaves a mental as well as a physical scar as women suffer a crisis of self-esteem from living with the consequences of a change to their body which is so intimate and so frightening.

It would be trite to suggest that Angelina Jolie has the power to lessen the suffering of anyone else because she has spoken openly about having a double mastectomy. But she undoubtedly warrants praise for her candour.

The fear and the physical trepidation can hardly be allayed but if Jolie is able to help other women feel better about themselves after having had a mastectomy, she will have done a brave and good thing.

Betty Ford, Olivia Newton-John, Lynn Redgrave and Kathy Bates are others who have gone before her, but none with Jolie's global status.

Earlier this year, she visited the Democratic Republic of Congo with Britain's Foreign Secretary William Hague, to highlight rape in war zones. It is now clear that she was already in the midst of invasive and troubling surgery. Even for a seasoned campaigner, this was an extraordinary feat. Jolie is no fair-weather celebrity campaigner. After filming Tomb Raider in Cambodia in 2001, she began working with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. She established a charitable foundation there and has worked to promote humanitarian causes in Sudan, Pakistan, Chad, Haiti, the former Yugoslavia and the Middle East. Her campaign against landmines and for the rights of refugees has been laudable.

Now, Jolie has entered another critical debate. She speaks plainly about the genetic test that led to her decision, and the surgery she underwent once she realised her chance of breast cancer was so high.

Jolie says she has gone public because "here are many women who do not know that they might be living under the shadow of cancer. It is my hope that they, too, will be able to get gene tested."

It is a stubborn cliche that those suffering from cancer are engaged in a battle. Christopher Hitchens, who died of cancer of the oesophagus, pointed out that it was more like "dissolving in powerlessness like a sugar lump in water".

In her own encounter, Angelina Jolie has shown fortitude and a characteristic determination to assist others.

Be as cynical as you may be about “The Real Housewives” from time to time, we’re glad to see that one of Bravo’s famous ladies is choosing to now use their platform for good, and to share a message of how she was inspired to be tested for possible breast cancer following the story of Angelina Jolie undergoing a double mastectomy.In a post on her Twitter account, Kyle Richards of “The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” explained recently how she is planning for her future by facing her fears, thanks to a very public piece Jolie wrote about her own decisions in the New York Times

Actress Angelina Jolie just announced that she underwent a preventive double mastectomy after learning that she was genetically predisposed to cancer. Her disclosure was a powerful show of solidarity with the more than 100,000 American women who undergo breast removal surgery each year.

But Jolie's story, while inspirational, is different from most women's. She benefited from a relatively uncommon nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), a procedure that removes the breast tissue while preserving the breast skin and nipple. With NSM, after reconstructive surgery, breasts are left looking mostly unchanged.

Such procedures are rare -- but they don't have to be. Recent advances in medical technology have made NSM and skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM) much safer and easier to perform. And yet, too few breast cancer patients know about these options. Bridging this knowledge gap is the only way to ensure that more women aren't needlessly disfigured.

Roughly 260,000 people are diagnosed with breast cancer each year in the United States. For many of them, the news of their illness is followed by a seemingly unthinkable treatment recommendation: a mastectomy.The most common form of this procedure, known as a simple or total mastectomy, removes the entire breast, including much of the skin and the nipple. Even if it eliminates the cancer, the disfiguring effects of the surgery can bring overwhelming psychological pain, especially for younger women. As a breast surgeon, I have witnessed the devastating emotional consequences of this procedure all too often.

It isn't just diagnosed cancer patients who must deal with the distressing aftermath of a simple mastectomy. Like Jolie, many healthy women with a heightened genetic risk of developing breast cancer choose to have some form of preventive breast removal.

From a medical standpoint, there's no reason that simple mastectomies should be the norm. Both NSM and SSM are minimally invasive procedures that, in the right patients, are as effective as simple mastectomies and carry considerable cosmetic and emotional benefits. With NSM specifically, not only can breasts look the same after reconstruction, according to many patients, they may look better.

And yet, NSM currently accounts for about 10 percent of the mastectomies performed. That so many women are being denied the chance to preserve most of the skin and the nipple and therefore a more natural appearance of their breasts is disheartening.

The problem is one of education. Women are often told by their doctors that NSM and SSM are difficult to perform and bring a higher risk of cancer recurrence. In fact, a 2011 study in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons found that SSM and NSM appear to be oncologically safe and did not increase the risk of cancer recurrence. A study in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery in 2011 examined the results of NSM over 20 years and came to a similar conclusion

As for the supposed difficulty of the surgery, that too is a misconception. I can personally attest that new technologies like the Eigr illuminated breast retractor system have made it possible to perform NSM and SSM more easily, more quickly, and with fewer complications. Such advances should help these procedures become more widely adopted.

Unfortunately, many physicians have remained in the dark about recent improvements in breast surgery. Recognizing the need to educate surgeons about NSM, the American Society of Breast Surgeons has launched the Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Registry to track the long-term results of those patients who undergo this procedure. But this is only a small step in the right direction.

Addressing this knowledge crisis will require women to play an active role by learning about their treatment options, seeking out informed physicians, and asking the right questions. To this end, there are a variety of valuable resources, including organizations like the American Cancer Society and websites like www.BreastCancerSurgeryOptions.com, where patients can weigh various procedures and learn from other women's experiences.

Angelina Jolie's remarkable story should bring hope to breast cancer patients and those at risk of developing the illness. Procedures like Jolie's are available to all women. The challenge now is to ensure that surgeons are trained - and patients are educated - in less-invasive techniques that vastly reduce the psychological and emotional effects of this life-saving surgery.

Dr. Richard E. Fine is a breast surgeon at The West Clinic Comprehensive Breast Center and Associate Clinical Professor, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee, Chattanooga Division. He is a Past President of the American Society of Breast Surgeons

She's been described as glamorous, talented, a humanitarian, and most recently courageous. But I'd like to add another. Angelina Jolie, in this oncologist's opinion, is one of the more deeply thoughtful patients I've come across. She seems to have a gift to make complex medical decision making look easy. And her gift to us may be in sharing the algorithm she described in making her own medical decision.

In case you missed it, on May 14, 2013 Ms. Jolie published a widely-reported op-ed in the New York Times entitled "My Medical Choice," in which she describes her mother's battle with cancer, her own diagnosis of a faulty BRCA1 gene and her subsequent prophylactic bilateral mastectomy to reduce her astronomical 87 percent lifetime risk of getting breast cancer. Most coverage to date focused primarily on the stunning admission of her personal medical history and dramatic surgery she has endured. Others articles hailed her for opening a conversation of managing cancer risk. And although both are true, I find most fascinating the simple yet elegant thought process Ms. Jolie described in coming to her own medical choice. I've seen countless women in my practice wrestle with this decision. Do I get tested? What will I do with the result? Is it worth it? Is this the right time? In her beautifully-written essay, Ms. Jolie lays out an algorithm for patients to work through in coming to their own personal decisions in the management of their own cancer risk: identification of increased risk of cancer, understand treatment options available and their effectiveness, decide if treatment is in keeping with our personal value system, and act accordingly.

Am I at increased risk?

Most cancers, including breast cancer, are sporadic. They result from acquired genetic abnormalities that accumulate over a lifetime. These require no special testing or treatment measures. But in a handful of cases, cancer can be caused by an inherited abnormal gene, passed along from a mom or dad to their children. So how can you tell the difference? As Ms. Jolie describes, get a good family medical history. Does your family seem to have more than its fair share of cancer cases? Do you have family members who get cancers early in their lifetimes? Thirties or 40s? Maybe even 20s? Many different kinds of cancers, not just breast and ovary, can be inherited. So be wary of other cancers including pancreas, colon, uterus, bladder and even melanoma. Rule of thumb: If your family gets together more at funerals than weddings, there may be a problemLead with your head.

Start with the science. Discuss the family history with your doctor or, better yet, a genetic counselor. These professionals can help identify genetic abnormalities known to increase your cancer risk through a simple blood test or even cheek swab. They will help you interpret the results and discuss options of treatment and effectiveness of risk reduction. Ms. Jolie describes a blood test for BRCA1 gene, which increased her likelihood of developing breast cancer to 87 percent over her lifetime. Most genetic cancer risks are not that high. Her double mastectomy dropped her breast cancer risk back to 5 percent

There can be some problems though. Firstly, all gene abnormalities aren't yet known. So approximately 12 percent of testing can be just wrong. Secondly, the risk reductions of all interventions aren't always as well known either. So you may not get fully accurate assessment, just the best we have at this time. Finally, evaluate all treatment options available along with the risks and benefits of each.

Follow your heart.

There will likely be several options available to manage the increased risk of cancer. Preventative surgery is not the only option and is used in less than half the cases of genetic abnormality. So don't forgo needed testing just because you can't part with your parts. Some medications reduce cancer risk. And out-of-the-box screenings such as MRI of the breast, scopes in the bladder and kidney tubes, capsule endoscopy (swallowing a tiny camera in the form of a pill which takes pictures of your intestines), and dermatology exams all can find and remove suspicious lesions before they become cancer. There is very likely some approach that you will feel comfortable with to reduce your cancer risk.

Act.

After careful consideration to the science of risk reduction through the lens of your personal values, there is usually a clear path to follow. Getting onto that path though is oftentimes a different story. Many folks, and at the risk of being politically incorrect, many women, run into obstacles in getting their own health care issues taken care of because they are so busy caring for those around them. Too many times I've diagnosed women with uncurable late stage cancers who got to them because they were looking after a spouse or child or a parent. It is not selfish to include yourself in the list of those people you need care for. Nor is it egocentric to put yourself at the top of the list. Your ability to care for others will be limited if you, yourself are unwell. Take the plunge. Make the decision. And follow through.

If it sounds like a lot of work, it is. If it sounds like some tough decisions will need to be made, they will. If it sounds like it's not worth it, think again. Ms. Jolie's reasoning behind going through this process is the integrity of her family. Her mother's loss to cancer was deeply felt and she wishes to avoid this trauma for her own children. Her reasons were her own, and yours will be your own. But at least there is a plan. A simple algorithm that may also keep your family together: identify the risk, lead with the head, follow with the heart and act. It may be the first thing you ever do.

I love Angelina Jolie’s coming out about her mastectomy, for so many reasons. Girls and women right now are growing up in an overwhelmingly gendered society and much of that continues to be perpetuated by women. Instead of providing positive and strong influences of femininity, companies and celebrities choose to remain disconnected from creating a safer, more equal society.

Victoria's Secret chooses to provide teens with anti-consent undergarments, Facebook remains disconnected from the pro-rape and abuse advertising on their site, and celebrities continue to present us with lackluster representations of women’s strength and equality.

Well, Angelina Jolie has yet again dissociated herself from the norm of her industry. She not only openly came out about her double mastectomy to prevent breast cancer, but also spoke about her femininity and its unwavering existence, despite her mastectomy.

Jolie’s article was inspiring and hopeful as she talks about her “strong choice” that in “no way diminishes her femininity.” She lets the readers know that nothing defines her as feminine and ultimately the surgery has no impact on her roles as a mother, actress, and role-model.

The dictionary defines feminine as “behavioral traits generally considered feminine include gentleness, empathy and sensitivity.” Derived from the Latin word femina, the word literally means "she who suckles (breastfeeds).” Our society also presents a definitive norm for femininity and we hold explanations and ideals of that normality.

Jolie’s article doesn’t just provide hope and empowerment to those suffering from the possibility of cancer, it presents a dialogue that can redefine and reconsider femininity. Although Jolie went through a surgery that may seem to reduce her ability to be feminine, Angelina instead used it as a medium to provide her opinion on what it means to be a woman. Angelia Jolie is one of many inspiring women who let us know that being feminine isn’t defined by our clothing, our personality, or our body type - but rather by our own tenure over our bodies and our ability to decide our own sense of femininity.

Actress Vanessa Bell Calloway couldn’t helped but be moved by the recent editorial by fellow actress Angelina Jolie discussing her decision to have an preventative double mastectomy. In 2009, the veteran of stage, television, and film went in for a mammogram and was told the results looked “suspicious.” The co-star of the Showtime series “Shameless"—who appeared in the original Broadway production of “Dreamgirls” and became a familiar face to fans in the hit films “Coming to America,” “What’s Love Got to Do With It,” and “The Crimson Tide”—shares with Allison Samuels of The Daily Beast her head-butting battle with breast cancer, the lessons she learned about relinquishing control, and her plans for a healthier future for her two daughters.

Well, breast cancer taught me a thing or two about control. I don’t have it—God does. After my first lumpectomy, x-rays showed more cancer in the margins around my breast. At that point I really should have started to consider having a mastectomy, but I didn’t. As Angelina Jolie implies in her editorial, we as women oftentimes connect our breasts to our womanhood and to our beauty, so we don’t want to lose them. So I had a second lumpectomy to remove what I thought would be the remaining cancerous tissue.

Melbourne, June 7(ANI): Angelina Jolie's decision to undergo the double mastectomy has inspired many people to take the problem of the deadly cancer seriously.

Doctor Hilda High at the Sydney Adventist Hospital, who works with patients having the defective gene BRCA1, has revealed that the so-called "Angelina effect" has created unprecedented interest in what they do, the Daily Telegraph reported.

The Wahroonga specialist has experienced that the inquiries regarding double mastectomy has almost doubled in the last month after the actress opted to undergo the preventive operation.

Dr. High said that Jolie has done a huge social service.

She added that there were people who really needed to be seen and who were putting it off and needed a role model. (ANI)

Suzy Cohen may be a pharmacist, but she is not a medical or surgical oncologist, nor is she a certified genetics counselor. Therefore, her advice that Angelina could have learned more about her breast cancer risk by "peeing in a cup," or that if she just took the proper supplements, she could avoid getting cancer is not only wrong, it is dangerous and irresponsible.

While not everyone who discovers she has a BRCA gene mutation opts for preventative surgery, many do and the reason is because it is the best available option we have at the moment, and one which all medical professionals agree provides significant reduction in cancer risk. It is extreme, yes — but no more extreme than watching and waiting, having mammograms and MRIs every six months or more, endless biopsies and constantly worrying about when cancer will strike — or worse, not catching it in time and then ultimately needing the surgeries anyway — plus chemotherapy, radiation and more — or dying from the disease.

Most women who opt for the prophylactic surgery have lost mothers, aunts, cousins, sisters, and even fathers or brothers, to cancer — and Suzy has no business telling them they should not do everything they possibly can to reduce their personal risk of cancer. Had I known about my BRCA status before getting cancer, I would have loved to have had the opportunity to have made that choice.

This is why it matters that Angelina Jolie went public: SCOTUS bars gene patents

It's a rare day indeed when I agree with Clarence Thomas on anything. Even then, it's hard for me to admit that I do in public. I'm doing so today because Justice Thomas wrote the unanimous SCOTUS decision that bars human genes from being patented. It's good news for people with cancer, especially people, such as Angelina Jolie, who suspect they carry the BRCA gene mutation. Banning the patent means genetic testing will be cheaper.Sometimes I'm skeptical about celebrities "going public" with their diseases and their issues. But sometimes the going public shapes our culture profoundly. Yesterday's Supreme Court decision bars gene patents, and while no one can draw a straight line between Jolie's public announcement about choosing a double mastectomy because of a gene mutation to the SCOTUS decision, no one can deny that together they have changed research and health care. This is why it matters that Angeline Jolie went public.I'll be the first to say that I don't know enough about this decision to comment on it with expertise. So, below, I'm pulling out some summaries from around the web about the decision.From the New York Times:The particular genes at issue received public attention after the actress Angelina Jolie revealed in May that she had had a preventive double mastectomy after learning that she had inherited a faulty copy of a gene that put her at high risk for breast cancer.The price of the test, often more than $3,000, was partly a product of Myriad’s patent, putting it out of reach for some women.That price “should come down significantly,” said Dr. Harry Ostrer, one of the plaintiffs in the case, as competitors start to offer their own tests. The ruling, he said, “will have an immediate impact on people’s health.”From Salon:The idea of having your genome Balkanized into small fiefdoms of intellectual property may sound offensive, but do gene patents make any practical difference? Yes and no. If you are worried about your genetic risk for breast cancer and Myriad doesn’t take your insurance, you’re out of luck. Want a second opinion on Myriad’s interpretation of your genetic risk? Nobody is legally allowed to offer one. Aggressively protected gene patents also interfere with basic research focused on studying how genes function and contribute to disease, because they prevent scientists from using basic research tools to study those genes.(What’s the point of a gene patent, then? Money. Your BRCA1 sequence is important to you, and Myriad wants you to pay them, and only them, for it.)From Slate:This kind of patenting [that Myriad was fighting for] can head off new research. In one survey of biomedical researchers, 30 percent of labs (subscription required) reported discontinuing or not developing diagnostic tests because of exclusive patent licenses. While other anecdotal evidence is mixed, in one study as many as three-quarters of researchers in the biotech industry reported that patents caused them difficulty in conducting their research. Take a look at scientific journals, and you can see this isn't just whining: After a patent covering a gene is granted, the citation rate for publications related to the gene declines (subscription required). This suggests that the patent is a real barrier to new research.From Lyle Deniston's SCOTUS blog (hat tip to Andrew Sullivan's The Dish)The decision was a major blow to a company that believed it had a right to be the sole user and analyst of two human genes, mutations in which show a high risk, for women found to have them in their blood, of breast and ovarian cancer. But the ruling will give medical and scientific researchers, and family doctors, greater opportunity to help women patients discover their potential vulnerability to those types of cancer.In a way. the ruling was a silent tribute to screen actress Angelina Jolie, who recently gained huge notoriety not for her acting but for voluntarily having her breasts surgically removed after discovering that she had the threatening mutations in her body. She, of course, was able to pay the high cost of that test; now, women of less means will be able to afford it, and that was a key motivation for challenging Myriad’s patent rights.I think that we need to separate the profit motive from scientific research and health care. This decision doesn't do that exactly, but it does treat your genome as more special than your iPhone.

Lowe, the first male spokesperson for breast cancer awareness, also said Angelina Jolie’s recent admission to a double mastectomy was important.“Whatever gets people talking in a world where there is so much taking up our bandwidth is a good thing,” he said.

Angelina Jolie was able to get tested for the BRCA gene mutation, and when she discovered she had it—and thus carried a very high risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer—she made an informed, proactive decision to preventively undergo a double mastectomy. But not everyone has access to health care and the chance to have this potentially lifesaving testing.On Monday on Good Morning America, Brad Pitt said his longtime love is back to "business as usual," adding that "her focus now is just to make sure all people have access to the [genetic] testing and know what they can do about it.""We were really surprised and moved how many other people were dealing with the same issue," the World War Z star said. "Her idea was that someone could learn from her story—she would love to share that. It's just been a beautiful thing to watch.""It seems to be a galvanizing moment for people dealing with this," he said, adding that the discovery of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene "doesn't have to be a scary thing—it can be an empowering thing."

Angelina Jolie's preventative mastectomy revelation has resulted in increase of women calling the Cancer Council NSW helpline. The agency said that the "Angelina effect" has raised health awareness in women in Australia.The Cancer Council has revealed that they have recorded 866 per cent rise in calls from women who want to get tested for cancer after the Hollywood actress revealed last month that she has had undergone preventative double mastectomy to decrease her chance of getting breast cancer.The 38-year-old Academy Award winner penned an op-ed on The TimesNew York in May titled "My Medical Choice," wherein she revealed that her doctors found out that she had the defective BRCA1 gene, which estimated her chance of getting the disease at 87 per cent. She underwent the surgery in an effort to decrease the number. Now, her chance of getting breast cancer has shrunk to 5 per cent.Her announcement has helped de-stigmatised the procedure, and even inspired people to get tested and learn about their medical options."We're calling it the Angelina effect because of the impact she is having," Cancer Council NSW helpline program manager Lorna O'Brien was quoted by Fairfax Media as saying."Angelina coming out with this publicly has seen hundreds of helpline calls from women mentioning her name as a basis for their call. People are really wanting to live well and be healthy, and they see that she's done it, so they realise that they can."O'Brien added that it's not about the "body beautiful" mentality that is driving women to pick up the phone, saying, "Angelina has made it OK to take these preventative measures."Cancer Council Victoria also recorded an increase in their calls. As a response to the 1033 per cent rise of phone calls, it is hosting a one-hour webinar on June 25 to allow the public to discuss their concerns about cancer risks in relation to family history in a forum.The Angelina effect is also felt online. After her announcement, the interest on "mastectomy" skyrocketed in searches 23,000 per cent increase, according to Huffington Post. The average online conversation for the word was also at 500 only, but was pushed up in excess of 100,000 online mentions after the A-lister came clean about her operation.To contact the editor, e-mail: [email="editor@ibtimes.com?Subject=FEEDBACK: [480500] The ‘Angelina Effect’ In Australia – Jolie’s Mastectomy Announcement Helps Increase Awareness In Women&body=%0A%0Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fau.ibtimes.com%2Farticles%2F480500%2F20130619%2Fangelina-jolie-effect-breast-cancer-council-nsw.htm"]editor@ibtimes.com[/email]

EXCLUSIVE: Woman who had double mastectomy hits stage in play 44 days after operationInspired by Angelina Jolie’s revelation of her double mastectomy, actress and dancer Tatyana Kot starred in ‘Mata Hari,’ portraying the sensual dancer and accused spy, at some points wearing a special beaded bra for what was supposed to be a nude scene. ‘I am not a hero,’ she said. ‘People have things that are so much worse. This is not the end.’

Though Angelina Jolie has received some negative criticism for undergoing a preventative double mastectomy, Tellwut found that 47% of online survey panelists believe she made the right decision given that she had tested positive for the BRCA1 gene. With over 1,800 voters, only 16% felt the decision was wrong.

PRWEB) June 26, 2013

Angelina Jolie recently shocked the world when she revealed that she underwent a preventive double mastectomy after she tested positive for the faulty BRCA1 gene. Not only did this disclosure stun the world, but it was also viewed as a ‘brave’ and ‘courageous’ act, reminding the public that that even the most glamorized celebrities are vulnerable to cancer; the same disease that takes the lives of millions of women every year. Tellwut's community of online survey panelists were supportive of this decision at 47%, with support from women only being slightly higher at 50%. 37% overall were undecided with just 16% feeling that this was a wrong decision.

Interested in gathering more information about panel member’s views and opinions regarding gene testing, market research company Tellwut conducted a survey about this health issue. According to the results, 42% of participants were familiar with the faulty BRCA1 gene. When asked whether participants knew of someone that had cancer due to the BRCA1 gene mutation, 12% of participants indicated that they knew someone with the gene. Although results indicate that the mutation gene has not touched too many participants, Jolie’s goal is that her story will open up a dialogue and encourage women to get tested for faulty genes, such as, the BRCA1 mutation gene. When asked whether panel members had ever considered having genetic testing done, the results indicated that only 16% of participants had considered genetic testing while 58% had not.

The lack of concern regarding genetic testing may be attributed to the fact that testing is very expensive, inaccessible and may result in denial of insurance for the person tested or their children. The BRCA1 test costs around $300 to $3,000 depending on the depth of the test according to breastcancer.org and is generally only covered under insurance for those who have a pre-existing family history of cancer such as breast cancer. According to the online survey results, the top reasons people choose not to have genetic testing performed were due to limited finances, no family background with cancer and poor insurance coverage. This correlates with a comment made by one Tellwut panel member who stated, “If you have the cash or the insurance it will be no problem to get the tests and decide to have the surgery and the reconstructive surgery. Angelina has the money to have everything necessary to ensure her health...most people do not!”

With most panelists in favor of her action, credit must go to Angelina Jolie for bravely disclosing her health issues to the public, for educating women about the BRCA1 gene and for being an advocate to women around the world. Education brings change and the ability to ensure better testing where warranted.

About Tellwut® Tellwut is a North American community of individuals dedicated to expressing their opinions through online surveys based upon a wide variety of topics in exchange for rewards and the Tellwut community experience. The Tellwut community and proprietary survey and reward software application provide a platform for organizations to send surveys to their stakeholders or to crowdsource and conduct online market research through the use of the Tellwut survey platform and the Tellwut Community; thus allowing businesses a clearer understanding and insight into their products or services, customer attitudes and potential business opportunities